Sue Twyford

Registered with Property118.com
Monday 4th April 2016


Latest Comments

Total Number of Property118 Comments: 28

Sue Twyford

14:18 PM, 16th September 2019
About 3 days ago

Section 21 abolition stinks!

Jeepers Luke!! I was just having my lunch when I started to read this.....but the responses have been amusing. Perhaps these tenants are just preparing to audition for a remake of the 2002 film "The Chosen Phew" !

But seriously though, how are you going to move forward on this one? Violation of the tenancy on every level surely, but the eviction process can be tortuous and lengthy.... Read More

Sue Twyford

10:15 AM, 14th September 2019
About 5 days ago

Government theft of another's possessions is plain wrong

Reader Michael Fickling summed it all up very well in his response to the article on 5th Sept "McDonnell’s distorted and dangerous version of Right to Buy" - see link:
https://www.property118.com/mcdonnells-distorted-and-dangerous-version-of-right-to-buy/comment-page-3/#comments... Read More

Sue Twyford

11:16 AM, 21st August 2019
About 4 weeks ago

Crowd Justice appeal: Gas Safety Certificate and Section 21

Reply to the comment left by Denise G at 21/08/2019 - 10:55I think you read it correctly Denise "This flat did not have any gas appliances, but the gas safety certificate was still issued....." Like you I was confused. Surely no gas, no certificate required. Perhaps it simply had a gas boiler, in which case a certificate is a must, but I'm only guessing. Otherwise, as you say, why would you need a gas certificate for something that doesn't exist? Perhaps someone can clarify.... Read More

Sue Twyford

9:52 AM, 26th March 2019
About 6 months ago

Manchester 'Rogue Landlord Hub'

Guess Andy Burnham didn't watch Ch4: Despatches last night !

Interesting that local government have no real authority over social housing organisations.... Read More

Sue Twyford

16:42 PM, 4th March 2019
About 7 months ago

Here we go again - PRS Right to Buy!

Just what are the "more socially productive investments" mentioned in the posting? The proposer doesn't say. Providing safe homes to rent in the PRS is surely "socially productive" since the local authorities don't have sufficient means? Furthermore, the tax we pay on our rental income, VAT on our expenditure/maintenance/advisors etc, inflated SDLT, is that not socially productive? Not to mention keeping judges and bailiffs in gainful employment? So the proposition is to grant discounted R2B, disenfranchising LLs with older properties, whilst ring-fencing the corporate developers with their new-builds!... Read More